User:Hahc21/ArbCom 2013

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Okay. This is the second ArbCom elections guide that I make, and I hope this helps to give an insight on each of the candidates, as well as my personal opinions on their suitability to become Arbitrators. Notwithstanding, I give you the standard disclaimer: This represents my views and opinions, especially on Wikipedia philosophy. I encourage you to do your own research.

A bit about me: I am Hahc21, a wikiarchaeologist who created his account on 2 March 2008 but never got into editing as a whole until September 2011. Overseas, I am an administrator at Wikidata, Wikivoyage and Wikinews, and bureaucrat at the latter two. Here, I am a delegate at the featured list candidates process and an clerk for the Arbitration Committee. I am a member of Wikimedia Venezuela, the Wikimedia OTRS team and the Foundation's Individual Engagement Grants Committee. I am the editor of the featured content section of the Wikipedia Signpost, though my name has popped here and there at the News & Notes section.

ArbCom: 2013[edit]

Judges cupola.png

A lot of things have happened since 2012's elections. 2013 has been a very tumolted year for the Committee. March was the hardest month of all. It all started with Kevin's unblock of Cla68, which spawned a lot of controversy and drama after the Committee decided to desysop the former in the midst of an outing debate involving the latter and Wikipediocracy. That same month, they unblocked Russavia (who was later re-blocked and banned by the community) and . The outing issue was so hard that on March 13, arbitrator Hersfold presented his resignation, and retired from Wikipedia.

That same day, the committee released a statement linking controversial user Malleus Fatuorum's sock puppet account, George Ponderevo, to his main account. This caused a lot of drama about whether the committee technically allowed Malleus, now editing as Eric Corbett, to use sock puppets without being held accountable for it. A day later, on March 14, arbitrator Coren followed Hersfold's footsteps and also presented his resignation from the Committee. Then, everything calmed down a bit until June, when the Tea party movement case request began. However, things were kept in calmed waters until Ironholds and Kiefer.Wolfowitz touched the Committee's doors after a disgraceful series of events, which saw the former desysopped and almost banned, and the latter banned.

To stir up the drama even more, the Committee had to hear the Infoboxes debate, which almost saw Andy Mabbett banned from the site, and handed restrictions to several users, including Mabbett himself. To make things worse, Bradley Manning decided to change his name to Chelsea Manning and made public his desire to be addressed as female. This spread incredible levels of drama, battlegrounds and edit wars all over Wikipedia which, as expected, ended up in the hands of ArbCom. Before the case (which saw a handful of users topic-banned) could close, another arbitrator left the group. NuclearWarfare, elected with the second-highest turnout in the elections of 2012, expressed that he was unable to continue his tenure in the Committee, and left on October 3.

Ten days later, Mathsci was banned by amendment of the Race and intelligence case. Now, on November, the Committee had to solve a difficult case regarding the Gospel of the Ebionites, a dispute that was present for several years now. Administrator John Carter requested a desysop and retired as a result of the case. Also that month, and as a result of a second escalade of outing issues, administrator Phil Sandifer, involved in the Manning naming dispute case, was desysopped and banned by the Committee as a result of his actions of outing and harrassment of another user in an external website.

So, in general, 2013 has been a very delicate year for the committee. It has had the highest number of resignations since 2010, when Hersfold, Vassyana, Wizardman, Rlevse (now PumpkinSky), Steve Smith and Fritzpoll left the committee. In 2011, Iridescent and Shell Kinney were the only ones not finishing their terms. No arbitrator resigned in 2012. Given the amount of resignations, this year will see nine seats fulfilled. Eight of these for two-year terms, and the ninth one for a single year. From the arbitrators whose seat expires this year, Risker, SilkTork and Kirill Lokshin have said they won't run for re-election.

ArbCom: 2012 vs. 2013[edit]

Almost everything people will remember about ArbCom in 2012 was the unfamous "Not a Wikipedian" series of events. For those not aware of what does it mean, it all started when a clarification request for the Civility enforcement case was filed, specifically asking the committee to evualuate how far could reach Malleus Fatuorum's topic-ban from RfA pages. The request rapidly turned into a lynchmob against Fatuorum, who had to face a motion to indetinitely ban him from the English Wikipedia. Five arbitrators voted in favour, five against, but what really dropped the bomb was arbitrator Jclemens' comment, stating that "all we do here is acknowledge that Malleus has never been a Wikipedian, no matter how many otherwise constructive edits he has made."

Such comment would start a series of events that led to him losing the 2012 elections thanks mostly to the comment, but also to an email leaked by arbitrator Elen of the Roads where Jclemens' supposedly declared war to all arbitrators standing for re-election. The email leak increased the already burning fire, and the 2012 elections were all about Elen and Jclemens. Both of them lost, and Elen of the Roads unofficially retired a couple of months later, in 2013. However, this was only the swan song of a very controversial year for the committee.

2012 started with the desysop of Malcolm in January, a long-standing administrator who was discovered had been using sock puppets to vandalize and disrupt the project. February followed with the closing of the Muhammad images case, which saw Ludwigs2 banned for a year. Another two users, Racepacket and former administrator Betacommand, were also banned that month. February also saw the close of the Civility enforcement case. Hawkeye7 was desysopped in that case, which also gave admonishments to administrators Thumperward and John. A weird case, TimidGuy ban appeal, closed at the end of February. In it, the Committee vacated the ban Jimbo Wales imposed on TimidGuy, and at the same time desysopped and banned longtime user Will Beback.

However, the most controversial cases of 2012 were, without a doubt, Rich Farmbrough and . Both cases were extremely delicate; the first handled the use of automated tools and misuse of administrative tools by Rich Farmbrough, who was desysopped and topic-banned. The latter saw Fæ desysopped and banned, as well as Michaeldsuarez banned.

We could say that 2012 and 2013 have been on par with regards of series of events, although September-November 2013 has been way more calmed than the same period of 2012, when the email leaks and "Not a Wikipedian" events were pretty fresh. However, several proposed decisions have caused considerable amounts of discontent among a slice of the community, but since most of the current arbs whose term is expiring have decided not to stand for re-election, no major repercussion can be expected this time, unlike last year's elections.

Candidates[edit]

Disclaimer: The comments in this guide represent my thoughts about the (un)suitability of the candidates for the role of arbitrator. They are not affected by any prior personal conflict, interaction or dispute I could have had with any of them.
Candidate Details

Wikipedia official icon.svg
28bytes
| talk · contribs · lu |
administrator, bureaucrat

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Symbol support vote.svg
Support

Notes:
  • Administrator since 2011
  • Bureaucrat since 2012
  • Only bureaucrat candidate this year.
Comments:

28bytes is exactly one of the few things ArbCom needs. He is a very well prepared and experienced user who would do a very good arbitrator. The fact that he is a (recently-promoted) bureaucrat means that the community trusts his actions, which also means that he is a very thoughtful user, overall.

To be honest, I did not expect him to ever run for ArbCom, but now that he did, I am happy supporting his candidacy. However, he still has to answer all the questions, so I might revisit this later. Though, I don't expect to change my vote.


Wikipedia official icon.svg
AGK
| talk · contribs · lu |
administrator, checkuser, oversighter

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Symbol support vote.svg
Strong Support

Notes:
  • Sitting arbitrator, elected in 2010.
  • Became an administrator in 2007.
  • Also serves as the chair of the Mediation Committee.
Comments:

Although I admit that I have not agreed with all of AGK's decisions, it's good to see him willing to serve another two years on the committee. He has been one of the most balanced arbitrators we've had, and one of the best in a while. He has made mistakes, yes, but having him as an arbitrator is something we should be looking forward to.

In the two years he has served in the committee, he has been one of the most active arbitrators, and definitely among those who seek fair treatment and decisions. He has been lenient when needed, and strong when needed. Sometimes too strong for my taste, but I think that it's better that way. So, I strongly support AGK for an additional two years as an arbitrator.


Wikipedia official icon.svg
Arthur Rubin
| talk · contribs · lu |
administrator

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Symbol oppose vote.svg
Oppose

Notes:
  • Currently topic-banned as per the Tea Party movement case.
Comments:

Although nothing looks bad from a first look, I don't feel comfortable supporting a currently topic-banned user for ArbCom. The topic-ban is way too recent for me, and even if it was a bad decision by ArbCom, the restriction is still in place, and although he would have to recuse from anything related to Tea party one way or another, I'd prefer if he had the topic ban removed before submitting his candidacy.

Also, as other have already commented, the fact that he has had multiple instances of problematic editing is a red flag when it comes to be sitting on ArbCom. For a user who has had repeated instances of problematic behaviour, it would be very difficult to properly assess and sanction users with the same behaviour.


Wikipedia official icon.svg
Beeblebrox
| talk · contribs · lu |
administrator, oversighter

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Symbol partially neutral vote.svg
Neutral

Notes:
  • Administrator since 2009
  • Oversighter since 2010
Comments:

This is a very difficult decision, and as such, and given that my nine support votes have been given, I am neutral. I like Beeblebrox but likeFloquenbeam, I am not sure he is completely fit for the job. Several incidents have taken place that make me feel uncomfortable supporting him.

However, he has been an administrator for a long time, and also an oversighter, which gives him a big amout of experience about ArbCom and private matters, which is a positive. Thus, I cannot oppose either. Notwithstanding, I feel that he has something (can't explain why) that makes him not ready for the job just yet. Some tweaks are needed before he can sit on ArbCom.


Wikipedia official icon.svg
Bwilkins
| talk · contribs · lu |
administrator

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Symbol oppose vote.svg
Oppose

Notes:
  • Administrator since 2007.
  • Jimbo Wales asked for his administrator bit in 2012; he voluntarily stayed again from his main account for six months.
  • He did so again in 2013, after a case request bearing his name was filled in 2013.
Comments:

Although I really like and appreciate Bwilkins' stance on civility, I definitely am against him as an arbitrator. He has some issues he needs to address before he is suitable for the role. I admit that I agree with several of his views, generally speaking, but I cannot support his candidacy. Actually, this was something I expected not to happen, but I was sure he wouldn't waste the opportunity to jump in. I think that, if he really wants to be an arb, he still has five years ahead of changes and work before he can be ready for the job.


Wikipedia official icon.svg
David Gerard
| talk · contribs · lu |
administrator

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Symbol oppose vote.svg
Strong Oppose

Notes:
  • Arbitrator in 2005.
  • Administrator, currently sanctioned and restricted as per the Manning naming dispute case.
  • Former checkuser and oversighter who lost his rights after a serious breach of privacy.
Comments:

He is just coming off a very controversial arbitration case where he was a party, and well, you cannot jump the border from party to arbitrator that easy. Also, there are some mistakes you should never make, and David did one of those. So, simply, he can't be an arbitrator, mostly per two reasons:

  1. I don't trust him to hold any advanced permission that involves private information.
  2. He is definitely not suitable for the role of an arbitrator.

In addition to that, I seriously disbelieve that a sanctioned and restricted administrator will be able to fulfill the role of an arbitrator as it should. In my opinion, even when he was arbitrator in 2005, he still lacks the perpective, thoughtfulness and understanding that is needed to hold the job.


Wikipedia official icon.svg
Floquenbeam
| talk · contribs · lu |
administrator

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Symbol partially neutral vote.svg
Neutral

Notes:
  • Administrator since 2010
Comments:

Floquenbeam running for ArbCom is an unexpected development that I did not foresee when I made my list of possible candidates, and therefore it's hard for me to make an opinion about him as an arbitrator. I like Floquen, and I enjoy many of his ways to get to things. He is a very fair user who always tries to create a balance, but he has also made some actions that make me doubt he is completely fit for the job.

For example, although I understood the spirit of his decision to partially ignore consensus on the Arctic Kangaroo incident several months ago, where he transformed an indefinite block into a topic ban, I was displeased by the fact that when he did so, he did not consider all the necessary information. I do not disapprove his actions there, but I would have expected a more broad evaluation of the matter before taking any action, since that's needed for ArbCom.

So, at the end, I don't know how to vote. I cannot oppose him because he is a great user that has experience as an administrator and knows how to make good decisions, but I cannot support because I am not completely comfortable with him being an arbitrator. If he gets elected, I hope he becomes a very sensitive and fair arbitrator.


Wikipedia official icon.svg
Gamaliel
| talk · contribs · lu |
administrator

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Symbol partially neutral vote.svg
Neutral

Notes:
Comments:

Gamaliel looks like a good candidate. However, I am not knowledgeable enoughabout him to either support or oppose his candidacy. As far as I know, he is not a regular of Arbitration, and that's a negative aspect, but notwithstsanding he looks like a reasonable user that manages to stay out of trouble, which is a positive.

In his answers, he has stated that he has participated in a couple ArbCom cases a while back. Some of his aswers are good, but I expected more on some, like Rschen's question about ArbCom's remit about offsite events. Generally, I think he could make a good arb in one or two years after gathering a bit more closeness to the current state of ArbCom.


Wikipedia official icon.svg
Georgewilliamherbert
| talk · contribs · lu |
administrator

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Symbol partially neutral vote.svg
Neutral

Notes:
  • Administrator since 2007
  • Ran for ArbCom in 2010 (44.26%, not elected)
Comments:

George William is a good user with a nicen list of core principles and years of experience as administrator. He ran for ArbCom before, in 2010, but received only a 44% of support, thus losing the election. He never ran again, and I did not expect him running this year either.

Thus, I am not sure I could support George for ArbCom. But I can't oppose him either. I mean, I usually only offer my support when I am completely sure that the user will do a good arbitrator; and I oppose when I am sure that the user is not suitable for the job. But with George, I am on neither of these positions.

His answers are fine, but are not the kind of answers I'd expect from an arbitrator. An arbitrator is a user that gives concise but detailed answers that explain the whole thing perfectly without becoming a big wall of text. I mean, getting to the point is good, but taking the time to craft a comprehensive text is better. I just feel he is not my choice for arbitrator.


Wikipedia official icon.svg
GorillaWarfare
| talk · contribs · lu |
administrator, oversighter

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Symbol support vote.svg
Support

Notes:
  • Administrator since 2010
  • Oversigter since 2013
  • OTRS volunteer
Comments:

GorrilaWarfare has always appeared to me as a good, reasonable user with a lot of experience, understanding and thoughtfulness on her shoulders. She is, ironically, what I would call a female version of NuclearWarfare. And thus, I feel comfortable supporting her for the job.

Her experience and line of thought would do good to refresh ArbCom. If she is elected, she will replace Risker's position as the only female member on ArbCom. If not, this would be the first time in years that ArbCom is an all-male body. However, I am sure that she already has her seat reserved with her name.


Wikipedia official icon.svg
Guerillero
| talk · contribs · lu |
administrator, checkuser, oversighter

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Symbol support vote.svg
Support

Notes:
  • Administrator since 2011
  • Checkuser and oversighter since 2013.
  • Non-ArbCom member of the Audit SubCommittee
Comments:

Guerillero has been a clerk for a couple of years now. He got my support in 2012 even when I wanted him to get more experience. However, even when he was among the top 8 candidates by guide writers, he finished eleventh, and thus did not get a seat. This year is a different story. He is far more prepared for the job, is now a checkuser, oversighter and member of the Audit SubCommittee. So, I am happy to, again, offer him my support.

Notwithstanding, if he is elected, I'd like to see him become a very strong arbitrator, with his own persona and character. These are my only doubts about him yet, although this may be because he has never been on the committee, and like what happened with Worm That Turned , you never know which type of arbitrator you will be until you sit on ArbCom.

Finally, I am in favour of his reform proposals for ArbCom. The changes he proposes to AUSC and BASC are things I am looking forward to, and they would be very beneficial for the community and will significantly reduce ArbCom's workload.


Wikipedia official icon.svg
Isarra
| talk · contribs · lu |

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Symbol oppose vote.svg
Oppose

Notes:
  • Cake-pedian since 2010.
Comments:

The cake is a lie!


Wikipedia official icon.svg
Kraxler
| talk · contribs · lu |

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Symbol partially neutral vote.svg
Neutral

Notes:
Comments:

Although I like his overall sense of things, I think that Kraxler still lacks the comprehensiveness and experience that is needed for an arbitrator. The fact that he is not an administrator is irrelevant though, and if he gathers enough experience and becomes more familiar with Arbitration without filing a request for adminship, I would be willing to support him for ArbCom.

However, taking a look at his answers, I see that he still needs some years of work before being ready. Not that I like buraucracy and answers like if they were written by a politician, but comprehensive answers are needed to showcase how comprehensive and thoughtful would you be as an arbitrator.


Wikipedia official icon.svg
Ks0stm
| talk · contribs · lu |
administrator, oversighter

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Symbol support vote.svg
Support

Notes:
  • Ran for ArbCom in 2012, but was not elected.
  • Has OTRS access.
  • Current ArbCom clerk.
  • Oversighter since June 2013.
Comments:

The problem with Steve last year was his lack of experience in dispure resolution, and about ArbCom and his nuances, mostly. Though, I still offered my support because I believe he had that arbitrator blood in his veins. He, like me, became a clerk, and now that almost a year has passed, my doubts about his lack of experience have been squashed away.

He has worked his way thought dispute resolution perfectly and I am, again, happy to offer him my support. However, he didn't do so well in 2012 (27.25%) and I am a bit worried that he could fall upon the same luck this year. I hope that he gets his seat; it won't be a bad thing if that happens.


Wikipedia official icon.svg
Kww
| talk · contribs · lu |
administrator

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Symbol oppose vote.svg
Oppose

Notes:
  • Administrator since 2010
  • Ran for Arbcom in 2011 and 2012.
Comments:

Kww is an excellent administrator, but he's definitely too rough for ArbCom. I mean, I like how he handles most things and his way of getting to the point on things like civility and misbehaviour, but I think he's better fit for ANI and AE than ArbCom itself. The fast-and-to-the-point-no-matter-how-route-we-take is an approach that can be extremely dangerous at Arbitration, and can lead to more problems than solutions.

He has shown that he is a very diligent defendant of the wiki, there's no doubt of that, and his stance on civility is one that I am supportive of, although he disagree sometimes on the methods (I am a bit more lenient and discussion-focused rather than action-focused), and his way of defending consensus on the Visual Editor matter is a proof that he is almost always on the same track than the community.

Making such a move to the WMF is a good sign that Kww would be an independent, I don't take your bullshit arbitrator, but apart from what I said above, given his constant involvement on most front page disputes out there, I am sure that he is better as just another long-standing administrator wandering there, free, taking care of what's needed to be done, than being on ArbCom.


Wikipedia official icon.svg
LFaraone
| talk · contribs · lu |
administrator, checkuser, oversighter

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Symbol support vote.svg
Support

Notes:
  • Administrator since 2008
  • Checkuser and oversighter since 2013
Comments:

This is mostly a "why not" support vote. LFaraone looks like a solid candidate, although I would have liked a bit more comprehensiveness with his answers. He also looks like having the experience and expertise enough for ArbCom, and well, he is my 9th support vote, and I'd give him a year to see how he performs.


Wikipedia official icon.svg
NativeForeigner
| talk · contribs · lu |
administrator, checkuser

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Symbol support vote.svg
Support

Notes:
  • Administrator since 2012
  • Checkuser since 2013
Comments:

Lots of good things I can see from NativeForeigner. He has a lot of experience on different parts of the wiki, knows what he is doing, and looks like a very sensible candidate. I like most of his stances on matters like how Arbitration should be handled, and the re-estructuring of BASC, and he has the level of comprehensiveness I look for in a candidate.

His answers all look good, and he looks like he has been preparing himself for this moment. Therefore, I am happy to give him my support for a full two-year term, and I hope he becomes the type of arbitrator we need, which is what it looks it would be.


Wikipedia official icon.svg
RegentsPark
| talk · contribs · lu |
administrator

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Symbol partially neutral vote.svg
Neutral

Notes:
  • Administrator since 2009
Comments:

I am just not sure that I am ready to support Regents for ArbCom. I went neutral last year, and I will (sadly) do so again this year. I don't know exactly why, but I am not convinced about his candidacy, although he is a long-standing administrator with a clean record.

Maybe next year I would be ready to support. However, I cannot oppose either because there is nothing out there that could make me say he is not fit for the job to the point where I would not recommend him being on ArbCom, but well, that's how it is. If he gets elected, I hope he becomes a great arbitrator.


Wikipedia official icon.svg
Richwales
| talk · contribs · lu |
administrator, checkuser, oversighter

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Symbol support vote.svg
Support

Notes:
Comments:

Well, here we are. Richwales ran last year and he wasn't ready. This year, things have changed. He has got experience at AUSC, and as holder of the checkuser and oversight tools. He is more prepared and his answers are on par with this notion. Although some of his stances on matters like civility are a bit off from what I perceive is the problem and the solution, I am sure that being on the committee will modify his perceptions on these matters for good.


Wikipedia official icon.svg
Roger Davies
| talk · contribs · lu |
administrator, checkuser, oversighter

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Symbol partially neutral vote.svg
Neutral

Notes:
  • Administrator since 2008
  • Arbitrator since 2009
Comments:

Wikipedia official icon.svg
Seraphimblade
| talk · contribs · lu |
administrator, edit filter manager

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Symbol support vote.svg
Support

Notes:
  • Administrator since 2007
  • Has experience at Arbitration Enforcement
Comments:

After reading his answers, tone and line of thought, I am happy to support Seraphimblade for a seat at ArbCom. I see him as a very thoughtful arbitrator that will take his time to vote on motions and remedies, and will carefully evaluate the situations before coming off with a solution. And that's what we need.

I also like his view on how sanctions should be handled and his perpective of things; always taking a look at all sides is a good thing for an user, better yet for an arbitrator. Blunt decisions lead to drama and crisis, but well thought-out ones lead to a better resolution of all the intractable disputes ArbCom has to deal with.


Wikipedia official icon.svg
The Devil's Advocate
| talk · contribs · lu |

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Symbol oppose vote.svg
Oppose

Notes:
  • Wikipedian since 2007
Comments:

To make it short, it's not that I don't like TDA, but he is definitely not suited for the role of an arbitrator. He is always at ArbCom's doors with each type of dispute, ranting when the committee declines to accept a case, or ranting if the committee accepts it and comes with a decision he doesn't like. It's more a matter of preparation and experience on dispute resolution than this, but it works as an indicator of if somebody is prepared or not for the job.

Arbitration Committee Elections

Withdrawn[edit]

Candidate Details

Wikipedia official icon.svg
Courcelles
| talk · contribs · lu |
administrator, checkuser, oversighter

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Symbol support vote.svg
Strong Support

Notes:
  • Arbitrator since January 2012
  • Administrator since 2010
Comments:

Courcelles joined the committee the same year AGK did, and they have both been great arbitrators since then. Although sometimes I disagree with his way of looking at things, I am a supporter of strong sanctions when needed, and Courcelles is perfectly aligned with that vision. I have been very pleased with his performance as an arbitrator, and thus I am willing to give him another term on the committee.


Wikipedia official icon.svg
GregJackP
| talk · contribs · lu |

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Symbol oppose vote.svg
Oppose

Notes:
  • Indefinitely blocked by ArbCom from 2010 to 2012
  • Great comeback as user, collecting several achievements as a content contributor.
  • Has never run for adminship.
Comments:

GregJackP is a great user. I applaud his intentions to run for ArbCom and all his good efforts to change his wiki career after being indeifnitely blocked by ArbCom from October 2010 until March 2012. His block was lifted, under restriction, which he finally got removed in September 2012. Since his return, he has done a good deal of content contributions, earning a Four Award, two Triple Crowns, and some featured articles and lists. Nice improvement.

However, Greg is yet too much inexperienced to have a seat on ArbCom. His honesty at least shows a sign that he is aware of this disadvantage, and if he were experienced enough, this would be a turning point in his candidacy. My recommendation is to learn as much from this experience, and if he really wants to be on ArbCom, run for adminship in a couple of months, then have another run in 2014.


Wikipedia official icon.svg
Kevin Gorman
| talk · contribs · lu |

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Notes:
Comments:

Wikipedia official icon.svg
Secret
| talk · contribs · lu |
administrator

Statement · Questions · Discussion

Symbol support vote.svg
Support

Notes:
  • First became an administrator in 2006.
  • Emergency desysopped in 2009.
  • Gained adminship back in 2013.
Comments:

Well, it is difficult to explain why I support Secret, but here it goes: He has a brave heart and he can be a very good addition to the committee. I know that a lot of people have mentioned that he has resigned his adminship twice in nine months, that he has 11 RfAs, blah blah blah, but the fact that he is still here even after all these incidents plus some real life complications means that Secret is one of these few users who deeply believe in this project, and when it comes to ArbCom, that could mean safe and sound decisions that would make a big, positive change for Wikipedia.

I don't really care much if he resigns mid-term, and worrying about it is nonsense. Coren resigned after only two months, and NuclearWarfare did so after 9. We've had countless resignations over the course of ArbCom's history, and of Secret later decides to resign he won't be the first. However, that's not a good reson to deny hima chance to make a change.

Arbitration Committee Elections